Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion

Jan-Benedict Glaw
2006-07-31T17:32:42Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2352 bytes --]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 18:44:33 +0200, Rudy Zijlstra <rudy@edsons.demon.nl> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-07-31 17:59:58 +0200, Adrian Ulrich
> > <reiser4@blinkenlights.ch> wrote:
> > > A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
> > > to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
> > > to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes; Not a
> >
> > So preparation work wasn't done.
>
> Of course you are right. Preparation work was not fully done. And using
> ext1 would also have been possible. I suspect you are still using ext1,
> cause with proper preparation it is perfectly usable.

Oh, and before people start laughing at me, here are some personal or
friend's experiences with different filesystems:

* reiser3: A HDD containing a reiser3 filesystem was tried to be
booted on a machine that fucked up DMA writes. Fortunately, it
crashed really soon (right after going for read-write.) After
rebooting the HDD on a sane PeeCee, it refused to boot. Starting
off some rescue system showed an _empty_ root filesystem.

* A friend's XFS data partition (portable USB/FireWire HDD) once
crashed due to being hot-unplugged off the USB. The in-kernel XFS
driver refused to mount that thing again, and the tools also
refused to fix any errors. (Don't ask, no details at my hands...)

* JFS just always worked for me. Though I've never ever had a broken
HDD where it (or it's tools) could have shown how well-done they
were, so from a crash-recovery point of view, it's untested.

* Being a regular ext3 user, I had lots of broken HDDs containing
ext3 filesystems. For every single case, it has been easy fixing
the filesystem after cloning. Just _once_, fsck wasn't able to fix
something, so I did it manually with some disk editor. This worked
well because the on-disk data structures are actually as simple as
they are.

ext3 always worked well for me, so why should I abandon it?

MfG, JBG

--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de +49-172-7608481
Signature of: If it doesn't work, force it.
the second : If it breaks, it needed replacing anyway.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]